Has Trump ‘chickened out' on Iran? Five reasons for his two-week delay
On Tuesday evening, Donald Trump appeared poised to join Israel's war against Iran. Having left the G7 summit in Canada early, he convened an emergency meeting of his national security advisers.
JD Vance, his vice-president and a staunch opponent of foreign military entanglements, signalled that the president was contemplating action. Mr Trump issued a series of increasingly bellicose warnings, demanding Iran's 'unconditional surrender'.
'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding,' he wrote in a social media post.
Yet within 48 hours, the president had pulled back. To some observers of US politics, this will seem like another instance of Mr Trump living up to his 'Taco' instincts – 'Trump Always Chickens Out', the acronym that so palpably infuriates him.
There are, however, several plausible reasons for delay.
Mr Trump's flirtation with war has sharply divided his base. Maga loyalists, whose foreign policy instincts are overwhelmingly isolationist, are aghast at the prospect of their standard-bearer dragging them into a new conflict, especially after campaigning so forcefully against just such adventurism.
'Anyone slobbering for the US to become involved in the Israel/Iran war is not America First/Maga,' Marjorie Taylor Greene, one of Mr Trump's most ardent Congressional allies, posted on social media.
The prospect of US military action in the Middle East has thrown into relief the deep ideological rift on the American right, one that sets traditional hawks like Senator Lindsey Graham, who still see the US as the world's policeman, against the populist wing led by figures like Steve Bannon, who reject the interventionism that characterised the George W. Bush era.
Mr Bannon and his allies have long argued that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were catastrophic, costly mistakes that drained US power and served global rather than national interests.
By championing an 'America-first ideology', Mr Trump has echoed that view, casting himself as a president intent on disengaging from distant conflicts that do not directly threaten the US homeland. He now faces a delicate balancing act.
Aligning too closely with Israel risks him being recast – by his own movement – as a 'neocon', indistinguishable from the foreign policy establishment he once vowed to upend. But appearing to abandon Israel, America's most cherished ally, carries its own political perils.
Beyond the politics, strategic considerations are undoubtedly playing a major role – factors presumably impressed upon the president by cooler heads at the Pentagon.
A brief delay allows more time to position US offensive assets. The USS Carl Vinson Carrier Strike Group is already in the Arabian Sea, while the Nimitz group is en route from the Indo-Pacific. Waiting will enable full integration with other US forces in the region.
With more than 40,000 US troops stationed across 19 sites in the Middle East, Washington will want to bolster its defences against potential Iranian retaliation. The US has upgraded air defences in the region over the past five years, but may still choose to deploy additional Patriot batteries or THAAD systems.
Allowing more time for Israel to further degrade Iranian defences may also be a consideration, particularly around the deeply buried enrichment facility of Fordow, likely to be the prime US target.
Mr Trump will be wary of the political and military fallout if a prized B-2 bomber were to be shot down. The more Israel weakens Tehran's defensive capabilities, the less risky the operation becomes for US forces.
Although Mr Trump has long opposed Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, he fundamentally sees this as Israel's war. In his calculus, the onus is therefore on the Israel Defence Forces to clear the path as much as possible.
If Fordow is to be destroyed from the air, only the US can do so using its 30,000-lb GBU-57 'Massive Ordnance Penetrator' bunker busters, which can only be deployed by the B-2. But Washington may expect Israel to lead in neutralising peripheral threats by knocking out radar sites, missile batteries, and command-and-control infrastructure that could complicate a US strike.
American officials may also be waiting to see whether Israel can carry out alternative forms of action against Fordow. Covert sabotage remains an option. Israel could target ventilation systems or access tunnels to seal the site or attempt to strike the plant's power supplies, a move that could cause its delicate centrifuge cascades to spin out of control.
A pause also offers benefits from an intelligence-gathering perspective. The US can use the window to monitor how Iran is repositioning its military assets, particularly its integrated air defence network and ballistic missile units.
Analysts will also be watching to see how effectively Iran's military command is functioning in the wake of Israel's campaign of targeted assassinations against senior generals.
Diplomatically, voices at the State Department may have counselled restraint as well. There are indications that Iran, while rejecting the demand for 'unconditional surrender', is signalling interest in a negotiated off-ramp. A short pause gives time for back-channel diplomacy to take place – possibly with Europe, and particularly France, playing a role in mediation.
Perhaps most importantly, the delay gives Mr Trump an opportunity to reassert some control over Iran policy – an agenda increasingly driven by Israel. Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's prime minister, appears to have calculated that the US president would eventually feel compelled to join his campaign and deliver the finishing blow to Iran's nuclear infrastructure.
Had Mr Trump launched strikes immediately, he risked the perception that the US was being led by its ally on one of the most consequential national security decisions of his presidency.
While that impression may prove difficult to erase entirely, the delay buys Mr Trump the space to project greater independence should he ultimately decide to enter the war in a fortnight's time.
There is one other possibility that cannot be discounted. The two-week delay could be a feint, designed to catch Iran off guard, only for the US to strike well before the deadline.
With a president as unpredictable as Mr Trump, anything, after all, is possible.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
9 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Support for renewables shrinks as fossil fuel interest grows
Support for renewables shrinks as fossil fuel interest grows Republicans and Democrats alike are less likely to support renewable energy than they were five years ago, according to a survey released June 5 by the Pew Research Center. Floodlight examines the survey results, which mirror growing pockets of opposition to solar farms, reignited political support for coal plants and moves by President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans to kill federally funded clean energy projects. This shift in opinion dates back to when Democratic President Joe Biden took office, said Brian Kennedy, Pew senior researcher and one of the study's authors. "This isn't a new trend," he said. Still, Kenneth Gillingham, professor of environmental and energy economics at the Yale School of the Environment, was surprised. "I see this shift … as a successful effort to link climate change and renewable energy to broader culture war issues," Gillingham said. He added that in the past, "prominent" Republicans supported renewables and sought solutions to climate change, but those stances could now be seen as "disloyal" to Trump. The survey of 5,085 U.S. adults taken April 28 to May 4 revealed that while 79% of Americans favored expanding wind and solar production in 2020, that number has dropped to 60%. And 39% of Americans today support expansion of oil, coal and natural gas - almost double the 20% that supported it in 2020. Combustion of fossil fuels - in transportation, energy generation and industrial production - is the No. 1 cause of climate change. Much of the change in opinion is driven by Republicans, whose support of oil and gas grew from 35% in 2020 to 67% today. But Democrats also indicated less support for renewable energy and more for fossil fuels than five years ago. While many results reflect Trump's policies opposing most renewables and boosting fossil fuels, Pew found a few notable exceptions: 69% of all respondents favor offshore wind - a technology Trump has specifically targeted. Both Democrats and Republicans indicated stronger support for nuclear power, with Republicans' favorable opinions increasing from 53% in 2020 to 69% in 2025. Democrats' support rose from 37% to 52%. The Trump administration has signaled support for a nuclear renaissance, despite its high cost. There were wide partisan splits on several topics. In March, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced it would scale back environmental regulations. Pew asked whether it was possible to do that and still protect air and water quality: 77% of Republicans said yes and 67% of Democrats said no. Pew didn't ask the respondents why their attitudes have shifted. But Kennedy said in Pew's past surveys, Republicans have expressed concern about the economic impacts of climate change policies and transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. Mike Murphy, a Republican consultant and electric vehicle backer, said when the environmental benefits of clean technologies are touted, it polarizes Republicans. Instead, Murphy said messages should be about pocketbook issues - like lower fuel costs - and jobs. "It's hard for pro-climate people to understand," said Murphy, who has advised dozens of state and national GOP campaigns including John McCain's 2008 presidential bid. "(They think) we just need to shout louder and hit people over the head about climate, climate, climate. The key is you want to talk about jobs and national security and other events that naturally resonate a lot more with right-of-center people." That's what Murphy's groups, the EV Politics Project and the American EV Jobs Alliance, are trying to do to depoliticize electric vehicles. "Whenever electric cars are seen through a climate lens," Murphy said, "their appeal narrows." It's a strategy also being used by the Electrification Coalition, a left-of-center pro-EV group. Ben Prochazka, the coalition's executive director, echoed Murphy's strategy, adding that EVs have "become overly politicized and caught in the culture wars, impacting markets and ultimately hurting our ability to realize their many benefits for all Americans." Prochazka noted that once introduced to EVs, consumers support them: "EV drivers love their vehicles, with more than eight out of ten reporting that their next car will also be electric." Perhaps those practical messages are getting through. In the Pew survey, electric vehicles were the one item that saw an uptick in support - 4 percentage points in the past year. But popular support might not be enough to stop Congress from killing a $7,500 electric vehicle credit, which Murphy said would be "policy disaster." Republicans, he said, are in a "real squeeze," because "they don't have enough money for the tax cuts the president has promised." Murphy said: "It's easier for Republicans to cut Biden electric cars … than it is for them to cut more Medicaid." Gillingham is still optimistic that solar, wind and other greenhouse gas-reducing technologies will move forward - because they are the cheapest. "The continued decline in the price of renewable energy and battery technologies, as well as other new technologies, is a reason to continue to have hope that the worst impacts of climate change can be addressed," he said. Published by Canary Media, Renewable Energy World Floodlight is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates the powers stalling climate action. This story was produced by Floodlight and reviewed and distributed by Stacker. © Stacker Media, LLC.
Washington Post
11 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Trump calls for special prosecutor to investigate 2020 election, reviving longstanding grievance
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Friday called for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the 2020 election won by Democrat Joe Biden, repeating his baseless claim that the contest was marred by widespread fraud. 'Biden was grossly incompetent, and the 2020 election was a total FRAUD!' Trump said in a social media post in which he also sought to favorably contrast his immigration enforcement approach with that of the former president. 'The evidence is MASSIVE and OVERWHELMING. A Special Prosecutor must be appointed. This cannot be allowed to happen again in the United States of America! Let the work begin!'
San Francisco Chronicle
12 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump calls for special prosecutor to investigate 2020 election, reviving longstanding grievance
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Friday called for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the 2020 election won by Democrat Joe Biden, repeating his baseless claim that the contest was marred by widespread fraud. 'Biden was grossly incompetent, and the 2020 election was a total FRAUD!' Trump said in a social media post in which he also sought to favorably contrast his immigration enforcement approach with that of the former president. 'The evidence is MASSIVE and OVERWHELMING. A Special Prosecutor must be appointed. This cannot be allowed to happen again in the United States of America! Let the work begin!' Trump's post, made as his Republican White House is consumed by a hugely substantial foreign policy decision on whether to get directly involved in the Israel-Iran war, is part of an amped-up effort by him to undermine the legitimacy of Biden's presidency. Earlier this month, Trump directed his administration to investigate Biden's actions as president, alleging aides masked his predecessor's 'cognitive decline.' Biden has dismissed the investigation as 'a mere distraction.' The post also revives a long-running grievance by Trump that the election was stolen even though courts around the country and a Trump attorney general from his first term found no evidence of fraud that could have affected the outcome. The Department of Homeland Security's cybersecurity arm pronounced the election 'the most secure in American history.' It was unclear what Trump had in mind when he called for a special prosecutor, but in the event Attorney General Pam Bondi heeds his call, she may face pressure to appoint someone who has already been confirmed by the Senate. A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment Friday. The Justice Department in recent years has appointed a succession of special counsels — sometimes, though not always, plucked from outside the agency — to lead investigations into politically sensitive matters, including into conduct by Biden and by Trump. Last year, Trump's personal lawyers launched an aggressive, and successful, challenge to the appointment of Jack Smith, the special counsel assigned to investigate his efforts to undo the 2020 presidential election and his retention of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida. A Trump-appointed judge agreed, ruling that then-Attorney General Merrick Garland had exceeded his bounds by appointing a prosecutor without Senate approval and confirmation, and dismissed the case. That legal team included Todd Blanche, who is now deputy attorney general, as well as Emil Bove, who is Blanche's top deputy but was recently nominated to serve as a judge on a federal appeals court. ___
